ITS Golf/Jetta weight changed

[Bildon]

For those who didn't notice:
The VR6 Golf & Jetta weight has been reduced to that of the Corrado at 2680# http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

Start building them!

http://bildon.com/images/s_ontrack/DTC_2.JPG


------------------
Bill Sulouff - Bildon Motorsport (http://www.bildon.com)
Volkswagen Racing Equipment
## 2003 ITB NYSRRC Champs ##

[Knestis]

Can you GET one to that weight? I honestly don't know...

K

[Bill Miller]

Yet they couldn't move the Neon from ITS to ITA because there's no way to adjust thw weight? Does this mean they're going to 'change' [sic] the weight on the A2 Jetta 8v in ITB to match that of the corresponding Golf?

And, the most important question of all, how does the CB do this and not call it a comp. adjustment? Or, put another way, how do they drop the weight of one car by 300# and then turn around and deny other requests to 'correct' [sic] weight?

Darin,

You like being the conduit for information fromt he ITAC to this BB, care to share w/ us what kind of documentation was presented to justify this one?

This whole weight thing in IT has gone way beyond just being a joke. Some of the folks here are so against any kind of formula, claiming that you can't take everything into account, etc. Yet they're ok w/ a process that 'misses' by 300#? C'mon people, the CB is making this shit up as they go along. They only break out the rule book when it suits them, or they want to shoot something down. And where was the request to 'correct' [sic] the weight? I don't ever recall seeing it in FasTrack. Yet, IIRC, it's 2+ years now that no response has been given regarding the weight specification process.

Think how this must look to someone from the outside. It really is a pretty sad state of affairs. Oh, and I'm sure that there are those, that when they see this thread are going to say "Great, another weight thread, Miller is going to go off on another one of his rants." Well, unlike the CB, at least I'm consistent in my position. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/rolleyes.gif


/edit/ Interesting to note, the 'corrected' [sic] Jetta weight is now 200# below it's SS weight. Also, there was a 130# weight difference between the Golf and the Jetta in SS, yet they now weigh the same in IT. I really am looking forward to the arguements defending this one.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[This message has been edited by Bill Miller (edited January 12, 2004).]

[Bildon]

Yes, I can get an A3 Golf down to this weight.

Bill, I must say that as of late the CB definately is making adjustments that previously were falling on def ears.

However in those cases where materials have been submitted over and over again only to be faced with disapproval (ie: A1 GTI) I don't see how the new attitude changes anything. As long as there are healthy #s of A1 GTIs and as long as they see the car placing well in ITB occasionally...that request for adjust (although well founded) will be denied.

What we need to do is get the REALLY fast A1 cars to stop putting big cams in them http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/eek.gif becuase it's skewing the results.



------------------
Bill Sulouff - Bildon Motorsport (http://www.bildon.com)
Volkswagen Racing Equipment
## 2003 ITB NYSRRC Champs ##

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Bill Miller:
And, the most important question of all, how does the CB do this and not call it a comp. adjustment? Or, put another way, how do they drop the weight of one car by 300# and then turn around and deny other requests to 'correct' [sic] weight?

It was listed under "Errors and Ommisions"... The car was recently classified... The weight was incorrectly listed at 2880 when it should have been 2680... The GCR allows specification changes for up to a year after a reclassification with a 30 day notification to competitors... I don't see where the issue is with this one... Cut and dried correction of an incorrectly listed weight. The car should be very competitive... WHY are you complaining? That's one more corrected... only a gazumpteen hundred to go...

What would you have done if, while using your formula, someone forgot to carry the 1??? Just leave the mistake??


As to the ITS to ITA move for the Neon... I disagree with the CRBs reasoning on this and it is being discussed...

------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Auburn, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg



[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited January 12, 2004).]

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Banzai240:
It was listed under "Errors and Ommisions"... The car was recently classified... The weight was incorrectly listed at 2880 when it should have been 2680... The GCR allows specification changes for up to a year after a reclassification with a 30 day notification to competitors... I don't see where the issue is with this one... Cut and dried correction of an incorrectly listed weight. The car should be very competitive... WHY are you complaining? That's one more corrected... only a gazumpteen hundred to go...

What would you have done if, while using your formula, someone forgot to carry the 1??? Just leave the mistake??


As to the ITS to ITA move for the Neon... I disagree with the CRBs reasoning on this and it is being discussed...



Darin,

Please don't insult my, or any one else's intelligence w/ that kind of comment. Recently classified? I think not! The car is listed in my '02 GCR, and if I could find my '01 copy, I would bet it's in there as well. So, so much for your one-year deal. The cars have been classed for at least 2 years ('02 and '03). They did the same thing w/ the VR6 Corrado, even though it had also been classed for a few years (in my '00 ITCS).

NEXT!

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Bill Miller:
I think not! The car is listed in my '02 GCR, and if I could find my '01 copy, I would bet it's in there as well.

Bill, I challenge you to find the 1994 to 1996 VW Jetta VR-6 in any ITCS prior to 2001, or the 1995 Golf GTI VR-6 in an ITCS prior to 2003...

The GTI being classified apparently prompted the others to be looked into as well.

The request asked for the GTI to be looked into. It's only been on the books for the 2003 season. The CRB obviously saw issues with the others as well and took the opportunity to correct them.

Again, WHY are you complaining? I'm pretty sure that the others owning these cars aren't to displeased. It looks like a step in the right direction to me.

If the process is all you are concerned with, then please focus you energy on someone who has the ability to make changes in that (namely the BoD or CRB themselves...), because the ITAC doesn't influence much of that at this time. AND, we are not here to defend/explain every action the CRB makes... All we can do is try to apply the rules. If you want explanations beyond that, contact the CRB directly...



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Auburn, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[Fastfred92]

Bill, Where in the 2003 GCR do you find a Golf GTI VR6 in ITS?????? I see a Jetta but no GTI..


BTW VW list the GTI VR6 20-40 lbs lighter than a Corrado VR6 depending on year

[This message has been edited by Fastfred92 (edited January 12, 2004).]

[Eric Parham]

Fantastic :-) When I first asked for classification of the '95 GTI VR6 in ITS, my documentation showed a vehicle weight around 2470 lbs. Add a 180 lb driver and you get about 2650 lbs. I was very disappointed to see the 2880 lbs in last years ITCS, but was too busy with other tasks to contact anyone about it. I'm glad to see that someone else picked up the ball and got this error corrected. 2680 lbs is much more accurate. Much thanks to whoever spoke up, and to Darin for explaining it to us all.

[ITSRX7]

I am 100% sure this came from me. As I was looking at ITS cars and weights, I saw that the VR6 Corrado was now at the same weight as the RX-7. I looked at my 2002 GCR and it showed 2860.

I asked the CB which was the right weight and they came back and stated that the 2680 was correct. (errors and ommissions)

I then looked at the other VR6 V-wagens in ITS and asked myself why the heck there was such difference between these cars (Jetta @ 2980) and pointed it out to the CB. Thsi was the result. Seems for the better, no?

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region #188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
http://www.flatout-motorsports.com/images/200_06_checkered.jpg

[Fastfred92]

Also, I asked the board to investigate the weight when the GTI first appeared in a Fastrack last year and supplied the oem info to support it. I have a SS VR6 GTI so that is all I was concerned with, I dont know where the Jetta change came from? I was supprised that they revised ( corrected ) it as I asked countless times to have the Golf III 4 cylinder changed to ITB and that was turned down until I sold my ITA Golf III.... I thought I would need to sell the VR6 to effect a change!

[Eric Parham]

Well done. IMHO, you've hit that nail squarely on the head!


Originally posted by Bildon:
As long as there are healthy #s of A1 GTIs and as long as they see the car placing well in ITB occasionally...that request for adjust (although well founded) will be denied.

What we need to do is get the REALLY fast A1 cars to stop putting big cams in them http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/eek.gif becuase it's skewing the results.

[Eric Parham]

Andy and Fred, Thanks! I think I owe you both a cold one, as I was just about to sell my '95 GTI. Plan changed :-)

[Banzai240]

<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">Andy and Fred, Thanks! I think I owe you both a cold one</font>

Oh sure... I put up will all the BS attacks from Bill, and Andy and Fred get all the glory! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

Just kidding... Andy, that's for the clarification... And Fred, thanks for stepping in with further information...

------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Auburn, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited January 12, 2004).]

[Bill Miller]

I stand corrected, the Golf wasn't there, but the Jetta sure as hell was. And what, it took 3 years for someone to realize that they made a mistake? Are they now going to change the weight on the A2 Jetta 2.0 16v in ITS to match that of the A2 Golf 2.0 16v in ITS?

And Darin, while it may be a step in the right direction, and there may not be many people that will complain, it's still inconsistent w/ the rules. You yourself said that some CB members weren't aware that they could have adjusted the weight on the Neon if they were to move it from ITS to ITA? How the hell could that be, if they were aware that they could change the weight on the A3 Golf VR6 since it was w/in its first year of classification?

This whole thing wouldn't be an issue if the CB would just answer the question that was put to them 2+ years ago. And while it may appear to be a step in the right direction, what it in actuality is, is another abuse/trampling of the rules. Sorry, but I'm not an "end justifies the means" type of person.

And I still don't see how you can rationalize the change to the Jetta.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Bildon:


What we need to do is get the REALLY fast A1 cars to stop putting big cams in them http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/eek.gif becuase it's skewing the results.



No Bill, what we need is people that belive this to be the case, to pony up the money and prove it one way or the other!



------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[RSTPerformance]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Bildon:

What we need to do is get the REALLY fast A1 cars to stop putting big cams in them becuase it's skewing the results.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Couldn't agree more... I will deffinatly go in on a protest with anyone willing...

Raymond Blethen

------------------
http://rstperformance.bizland.com/rstsignature.jpg
RST Performance Racing
www.rstperformance.com (http://www.rstperformance.com)
1st and 2nd 2003 ITB NARRC Championship
1st and 6th 2003 ITB NERRC Championship
3rd 2003 ITB ARRC Sprint Race
4th 2003 ITB ARRC Endoro
1st 2003 AS NERRC and NARRC Championships

[Fastfred92]

I am stuck with SSB for 2004 but I sure will convert to ITS for 2005! Now if we can just get them to go for some "replacement" cams and a shift of about 300lbs of the 2680 to the rear of the car we might be able to keep a safe distance behind the mighty E36 !!!

[pfcs]

ABSOLUTELY-lets see about those A1 cams, I'd support you in that-but DON'T protest any A2s!!! Phil

[ITSRX7]

Originally posted by Bill Miller:
Are they now going to change the weight on the A2 Jetta 2.0 16v in ITS to match that of the A2 Golf 2.0 16v in ITS?


Actually, I would vote for these cars in ITA with a closer look atthier weight in the PCA context.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region #188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
http://www.flatout-motorsports.com/images/200_06_checkered.jpg

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Bill Miller:
And I still don't see how you can rationalize the change to the Jetta.



I don't try anymore... It's done, it appears to be the right move... I'm happy that we're moving in the right direction...


I have more pressing matters to worry about right now... Like how I'm suppose to compete against a 2.8L 4-valve V6 powered car with monster front brakes and the ability to get down to it's now 2680lbs weight... With a car that is powered by a 2.4L 4v 4-cyl with miniscule brakes that has no shot at getting within 80lbs of it's required minimum weight of 2650lbs... ONLY 30lbs less than the VW... http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/eek.gif

Can I change my vote??? http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Auburn, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[Bildon]

>> 2.8L 4-valve V6 powered car with monster front brakes

What car is that?

- Bill

[Bill Miller]

Actually, I would vote for these cars in ITA with a closer look atthier weight in the PCA context.


Well Andy, you've got your chance!


Originally posted by Banzai240:
I don't try anymore... It's done, it appears to be the right move... I'm happy that we're moving in the right direction...


I have more pressing matters to worry about right now... Like how I'm suppose to compete against a 2.8L 4-valve V6 powered car with monster front brakes and the ability to get down to it's now 2680lbs weight... With a car that is powered by a 2.4L 4v 4-cyl with miniscule brakes that has no shot at getting within 80lbs of it's required minimum weight of 2650lbs... ONLY 30lbs less than the VW... http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/eek.gif

Can I change my vote??? http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif




Glad to know where you come down on issues like this Darin. And plese quit putting out mis-information. The VR6 motors in question are 2-valve motors, not 4-valve motors. And it remains to be seen if anyone can get a Jetta down to that weight. If nothing else, it's got the whole issue of 2 extra doors/windows/etc. to deal with. And I'm not convinced that you can get a Golf to that weight either.

And, FWIW... According to Edmunds.com says:

1995 Jetta GLX: 2980 lbs.

1995 GTI VR6: 2818 lbs.

/edit/ Golf/Jetta VR6 cars came w/ 280mmF/226mmR and the S14 Nissan 240SX came w/ 295mmF/258mmR.

Which one of those cars has monster brakes? Typical Darin tactic, bluster and mislead when the facts don't fit his agenda.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[This message has been edited by Bill Miller (edited January 13, 2004).]

[ryotko]

Originally posted by Bill Miller:

/edit/ Golf/Jetta VR6 cars came w/ 280mmF/226mmR and the S14 Nissan 240SX came w/ 295mmF/258mmR.

Which one of those cars has monster brakes? Typical Darin tactic, bluster and mislead when the facts don't fit his agenda.



Go post this crap on the vortex, there's no reason for it here.

If someone has facts wrong, and you feel strongly about it, send him an email and give him the chance to correct it. I find it very hard to believe that someone would intentionally post misinformation about something so easy to check.

I value the information and opinions on this site. If people stop posting due to attacks like this we all lose.

-Bob

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Bildon:
>> 2.8L 4-valve V6 powered car with monster front brakes

What car is that??

- Bill

Sorry Mr. Bildon... got the valve configuration wrong... Saw DOHC on the spec line and thought the worst... My Bad...

And, I'm glad to see my attempts at being light hearted/humorous aren't lost on Mr. Miller... (note to self... Bill won't think it's funny, he'll just think it's another "tactic"... so don't even try... http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/rolleyes.gif )


For Mr. Millers benefit, and to help prevent HIM from speading further misinformation... the 240SX does NOT have 295mm front brakes, as the ITCS would lead you to believe... it has 258mm x 22mm vented front discs and the Spec Line is incorrect... I don't know where the current specs came from...

So, 280mm is indeed a monster brake compared to what the 240SX runs...

I'd like to see just what weight these cars can get down to, because if they end up grossly overweight in IT trim, that data would be good to know. When someone gets one of these ready to go, please pass on this information so I can add it to the spreadsheet of IT weights vs. Ballast that is ongoing...

Well... better get back to my "agenda"... (Mr. Miller, would you mind faxing me a copy of exactly what that is, because I seem to have lost mine... http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/tongue.gif Oops... I said I wouldn't do that anymore... http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif )

------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Auburn, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited January 13, 2004).]

[Greg Amy]

<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">...powered by a 2.4L 4v 4-cyl with miniscule brakes</font>

Oh, you poor, poor little thing! Come sit over here, let us make you feel better... (Patting him on the back, violins playing in the background...)

Brought to you by the 2.0L-and-under 4-cyl front-wheel-drive ITS contigent...

http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

(edited to put a smiley face in there, lest anyone get their panties in a twaddle...)

[This message has been edited by grega (edited January 13, 2004).]

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by grega:
Brought to you by the 2.0L-and-under 4-cyl front-wheel-drive ITS contigent...

http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

Just so you know... there is a conference call upcoming where this will be one of several issues to be discussed. Give it some time, because it makes sense to VERY few that we have the group of cars that we do in ITS and expect them to compete against each other. It's just that working out and appropriate solution may take some time...

------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Auburn, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg


[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited January 13, 2004).]

[Greg Amy]

You know the Five Stages of Mourning?

- Denial and Isolation
- Anger
- Bargaining
- Depression
- Acceptance

I'm well into Stage 5. Patience? I've got nothing but time, baby...while I build my Spec Miata. Get us into ITA (where I can't even keep up with the ARRC 2003 2nd-place and ITA lap record holder, Anthony Serra) and I'll be forever grateful and back in town enjoying Improved Touring.

Need data? Need opinions? Need aspirin? Just call.